PDA

View Full Version : What are chances of real dark horse winner of either the mens or womens at U.S Open?


lambielspins
08-19-2007, 03:39 PM
Does anyone think we could have a real dark horse winner in either the womens or mens sides of this years U.S Open? What are the chances.

dave333
08-19-2007, 03:51 PM
By dark horse, do you mean some random dude/gal in the top 200 or something?

Basically none though, with fed, nadal, roddick, djoko, etc. on the mens and sharapova, henin, williams sisters, ivanovich, jankovich etc. on womens.

Supernatural_Serve
08-19-2007, 03:52 PM
Men: 0
Women: very small chance

Zets147
08-19-2007, 03:54 PM
Gogo Donald Young!

Gilic
08-19-2007, 03:58 PM
1 : 200 almost minimal

tennispro11
08-19-2007, 04:49 PM
I would say on the women's side their is a pretty good chance. On the men's side, No. Not even a slim one.

lethalfang
08-19-2007, 05:45 PM
When you say dark horse, do you mean anyone not in the top 3 (e.g. Andy Roddick), or do you mean players we hardly discuss?

xtremerunnerars
08-19-2007, 05:48 PM
If you want to know who will win the womens tournament, put 10 names into a hat and pick one. There's your winner!

Mens side, there's no way someone will come from nowhere and win it.

edmondsm
08-19-2007, 05:49 PM
Two words: Dr. Ivo....with O.2%

kingkong
08-19-2007, 05:51 PM
bartoli actually got to the final of wimbledon

need I say more?

Fedace
08-19-2007, 05:52 PM
I will pick Sam Querry, or Donald Young or Sam Warburg.

daddy
08-19-2007, 06:19 PM
NO chance, look at history. Least surprises came in us open, other surfaces have more different winners except for winby where players like fed and sampras and borg dominate for years. Us uis right aswfer, I guess good top players will win , no surprise winners. Maybe some surprises on the road.

daddy
08-19-2007, 06:20 PM
I will pick Sam Querry, or Donald Young or Sam Warburg.

Uh, Ive heard of the two on this forum, the thirdone, I guess hes a usa guy also ? Cmon ppl, they have to play a bit to win, not just come out of mamas hands and take a slam.

lambielspins
08-19-2007, 06:22 PM
Dark horse would be people not considered in the main group of contenders, but still somewhat a threat, sort of a second group player. Here would be some players I would categorize as dark horse winners:

Men - Gasquet, Berdych, Murray, Haas, Youzhny, Gonzalez, Baghdatis, Blake
Women - Vaidisova, Kuznetsova, Schnyder, Hingis, Peer, Chakvetadze, Petrova

Here are players I would definitely not classify as dark horse winners:

Men - Federer, Djokovic, Nadal
Womens - Henin, Serena, Venus, Sharapova

Here are players I would probably not classify as dark horse winners either:

Men - Roddick (big surprise but not dark horse), Davydenko, Hewitt
Womens - Jankovic, Ivanovic

lambielspins
08-19-2007, 06:23 PM
I will pick Sam Querry, or Donald Young or Sam Warburg.

Those would not fall under "dark horse" category, but "out of the blue" category.

Fedace
08-19-2007, 06:44 PM
Those would not fall under "dark horse" category, but "out of the blue" category.

Sam Warburg was a huge hit at World team tennis this year.

phoony
08-19-2007, 08:08 PM
Men - it should be Fed again
Women - 50 50 (hard to predict)

bagung
08-19-2007, 08:56 PM
only three has the chance to win us open....
federer, nadal, and djokovic....
the rest ? might as well forget about it........... they are all in the different league as fed, rafa and joker.

Dimonator133
08-19-2007, 09:40 PM
Dark horse would be people not considered in the main group of contenders, but still somewhat a threat, sort of a second group player. Here would be some players I would categorize as dark horse winners:

Men - Gasquet, Berdych, Murray, Haas, Youzhny, Gonzalez, Baghdatis, Blake
Women - Vaidisova, Kuznetsova, Schnyder, Hingis, Peer, Chakvetadze, Petrova

Here are players I would definitely not classify as dark horse winners:

Men - Federer, Djokovic, Nadal
Womens - Henin, Serena, Venus, Sharapova

Here are players I would probably not classify as dark horse winners either:

Men - Roddick (big surprise but not dark horse), Davydenko, Hewitt
Womens - Jankovic, Ivanovic



MURRAY!??!?! HAHAHAHAHAHA.

And how are Jankovic and Ivanovic on a different level than Venus, Serena, and Sharapova?????????

SoBad
08-19-2007, 10:04 PM
I have not gotten around to making analysis and predictions yet, but if defending champion Safin is to be upset, some names that come to mind in preliminary brainstorming are Korolev, Sweeting, Klizan, Fleishman. Soon it will be time to do more thorough analysis and predictions.

ferocious4hand
08-19-2007, 10:06 PM
defending champion Safin is to be upset

What year are we in...?:confused:

ferocious4hand
08-19-2007, 10:07 PM
sorry dbl faulted

SoBad
08-19-2007, 10:09 PM
Because after that for a few years he had more important things to focus on, so the actual "champions" were flukes.

Dimonator133
08-19-2007, 10:11 PM
some names that come to mind in preliminary brainstorming are Korolev, Sweeting, Klizan, Fleishman. Soon it will be time to do more thorough analysis and predictions.


if those are four names that come to mind, please spare us of any further analysis

SoBad
08-19-2007, 10:24 PM
sorry dbl faulted

I forgive you.

if those are four names that come to mind, please spare us of any further analysis

The more you analyse, the more accurate analysis becomes, so it is never fair to tell someone "stop analysing".

CyBorg
08-19-2007, 10:24 PM
I have not gotten around to making analysis and predictions yet, but if defending champion Safin is to be upset, some names that come to mind in preliminary brainstorming are Korolev, Sweeting, Klizan, Fleishman. Soon it will be time to do more thorough analysis and predictions.

What a bunch of nonsense.

No John Isner? Like, duh.

SoBad
08-19-2007, 10:28 PM
What a bunch of nonsense.

No John Isner? Like, duh.

John Isner has a good serve - there is no question about that. However, that is not enough to compete well at the very highest level of the game, which grand slam tournament play undoubtedly involves. This year Isner lost to Devvarman who lost to Goldstein who isn't even good, so there is still a lot of work to be done by Isner to be able to compete at the highest levels. History doesn't really favour the really tall ones with huge serve, as far as slam success is concerned.

Dimonator133
08-19-2007, 10:42 PM
The more you analyse, the more accurate analysis becomes, so it is never fair to tell someone "stop analysing".


um, ok.

you're not making any sense in your analysis, and your not making any sense in your analysis of analysis. Please stop.

Dimonator133
08-19-2007, 10:47 PM
This year Isner lost to Devvarman who lost to Goldstein who isn't even good, so there is still a lot of work to be done by Isner to be able to compete at the highest levels.


HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. OK. THAT makes sense.


I mean Federer lost to Canas who lost to Michael Berrer who lost to Frederico Gil, Alessio di Mauro, and Jan Mertl.

So yeah, Federer is clearly the worst player in the world. By far.

Get off the board please.

SoBad
08-19-2007, 10:48 PM
um, ok.

you're not making any sense in your analysis, and your not making any sense in your analysis of analysis. Please stop.

Your attempts at criticism of analysis are poor at the very most, so I suggest you quit while you're behind.

Dilettante
08-19-2007, 11:00 PM
only three has the chance to win us open....
federer, nadal, and djokovic....
the rest ? might as well forget about it........... they are all in the different league as fed, rafa and joker.

US Open surface is tough for Nadal as long as he has to face flat hitters. There are some players out there that are fast-HC specialists and could attack his vulnerabilities just as James Blake does.

Is not that Nadal can't play a good fast HC game (he has proven he can be very good on the surface), it's that there are a bunch of players that can beat him more easily than in other surfaces. Nadal is the undisputed best on clay, on grass there are not many specialists and he is talented enough to take advantadge of that, but on a fast-low bouncing HC he's not the best and there's not a lack of specialists.

I'm not saying that he's not able to win a US Open because obviously he has a hell of a talent, but Federer, Djokovic and others don't have the same vulnerabilities on the surface. Much more difficult for Rafa. You don't think about matchup when Nadal plays on clay because doesn't matter much who is playing against him. But for him, on US Open HC matchup matters, and does matter a lot.

Noveson
08-19-2007, 11:03 PM
Your attempts at criticism of analysis are poor at the very most, so I suggest you quit while you're behind.

I don't think is the one behind;)

SoBad
08-19-2007, 11:12 PM
I don't think is the one behind;)

C'mon Noveson be nice.:grin: ;)

CyBorg
08-22-2007, 07:01 PM
John Isner has a good serve - there is no question about that. However, that is not enough to compete well at the very highest level of the game, which grand slam tournament play undoubtedly involves. This year Isner lost to Devvarman who lost to Goldstein who isn't even good, so there is still a lot of work to be done by Isner to be able to compete at the highest levels. History doesn't really favour the really tall ones with huge serve, as far as slam success is concerned.

Oh, shut up. Isner on the bizarro scale rates a perfect 5. Live with it, Russki!

SoBad
08-22-2007, 11:23 PM
Oh, shut up. Isner on the bizarro scale rates a perfect 5. Live with it, Russki!

Vasily Chapayev wannabe rates two full notches above John Isner on the same scale, and now finds himself in dire need of shutting himself up.

JBlake27
08-23-2007, 08:22 AM
Blake I think can win as a dark horse, and I think Mardy Fish can sneak his way into the quarterfinals

daddy
08-23-2007, 09:50 AM
Blake I think can win as a dark horse, and I think Mardy Fish can sneak his way into the quarterfinals

Blake is not a dark horse. By any means.

CyBorg
08-25-2007, 11:58 AM
Vasily Chapayev wannabe rates two full notches above John Isner on the same scale, and now finds himself in dire need of shutting himself up.

That goes without saying. Chapaev, then Bazarov from Fathers and Sons, then Isner, then Lenin, then muffin man from the laboratory of the utility muffin research kitchen.

saram
08-25-2007, 12:16 PM
That goes without saying. Chapaev, then Bazarov from Fathers and Sons, then Isner, then Lenin, then muffin man from the laboratory of the utility muffin research kitchen.

Muffin Man? Do you know the Muffin Man? The one that lives on Drury Lane???

;) ;)

CyBorg
08-25-2007, 08:48 PM
Muffin Man? Do you know the Muffin Man? The one that lives on Drury Lane???

;) ;)

No, no. Not that one. The one who stuffs his pants with muffins, but detests cupcakes.

tennispro11
08-25-2007, 09:01 PM
No, no. Not that one. The one who stuffs his pants with muffins, but detests cupcakes.

I like cupcakes. :)

SoBad
08-25-2007, 10:11 PM
I don't get all this muffin man humour.

P.S. Lenin didn't even have a backhand.

Batoussai
08-26-2007, 03:00 AM
When you say dark horse, do you mean anyone not in the top 3 (e.g. Andy Roddick), or do you mean players we hardly discuss?

Isn't that the same? :p

CyBorg
08-26-2007, 10:29 AM
I don't get all this muffin man humour.

P.S. Lenin didn't even have a backhand.

John Lenin had an ape named Coco.

SoBad
08-26-2007, 11:23 PM
John Lenin had an ape named Coco.

Sure you're not confusing him with the namesake lead singer from "Queen" who was knifed outside plaza hotel in new york by a hingis fan?

CyBorg
08-28-2007, 03:33 PM
Sure you're not confusing him with the namesake lead singer from "Queen" who was knifed outside plaza hotel in new york by a hingis fan?

It was probably Hingis herself that did it. Stone-cold beeatch she is.

SoBad
08-28-2007, 11:13 PM
Not as ruthless as Fanny Kaplan, and far better court sense and drive volleys.

ShooterMcMarco
08-28-2007, 11:17 PM
I don't get all this muffin man humour.

P.S. Lenin didn't even have a backhand.

Justinne Lenin-Hardenne?

SoBad
08-28-2007, 11:20 PM
I still don't get it, but for a girl Justine has a great backhand.

SoBad
08-30-2007, 12:01 AM
She dumped her flaky husband.